Editorial: Two ways to create more open government in Lansing

Following is one of a series of Press editorials during Sunshine Week, established by the American Society of News Editors to celebrate and safeguard open and transparent government.

A different set of lawmakers came into office this year in Lansing, promising reform and a no-nonsense attack on old problems.

Here are two issues they should tackle that their former colleagues resolutely neglected: New regulation of robocalls and disclosure rules for their own finances.

Both those steps would bring greater transparency to elections and governing. Yet every time bills making these changes are introduced, they die. Leaders in one party or another offer lame excuses about why the business isn’t getting done. Both reforms have been reintroduced in the Legislature this session. We hope the new class of lawmakers will finally accomplish these changes in the name of good government.

Automated robotic phone calls — robocalls — that assault voters every election season have become a staple of modern campaigns. They’re cheap, easy and allow campaigns to reach a huge number of voters in a relatively short time.

They’re also unregulated. While a campaign running an advertisement in a newspaper or on television has to disclose who covered the cost — “Paid for by the committee to elect So-and-So” — no such requirement applies to robocalls.

The worst of those calls occur in the eleventh hour of heated campaigns and make anonymous, sometimes unfounded accusations. Voters deserve to at least know who’s behind those attacks. Lawmakers should mandate that simple requirement. They can do so by updating the state’s Campaign Finance Act to include robocalls, e-mail and other modern forms of communication. Allowing anonymous attacks encourages the worst in political behavior. Recent campaigns confirm that observation. Changing it isn’t difficult.

Michigan remains one of only a few states that does not require elected officials to file any kind of personal finance disclosure forms. Conflict of interest? We don’t know. We should.
Michigan elected officials — governor, secretary of state, attorney general, legislators, judges and even some staff members — ought to make personal finance disclosures on a regular basis. Apply the same rules to people running for office.

That type of disclosure is required of people running for and serving in Congress. What’s more, those requirements apply to people serving in 47 statehouses around the country. Most mandate that lawmakers state their occupation, the sources of their income, the names of corporations in which they hold positions, the names of businesses in which they hold a financial interest and other relevant information. Most demand similar information about spouses and dependent children. The reason is simple. If they have an interest in something on which they’re voting, citizens have a right to know.

Only Michigan, Idaho and Vermont refuse to demand this information of elected leaders. Michigan is the only state with a full-time Legislature that allows elected officials to completely escape scrutiny.

There is a lot of talk about reinventing government in Lansing. Bills have been introduced that would correct these oversights in Michigan law concerning robocalls and personal finance disclosure. Passing them would be a great reinvention in the name of open government.